The report on setting pupils for mathematics (TES, April 16) did not accurately represent my views. I did not say that the Office for Standards in Education report Setting in primary schools is "flimsy and inconclusive". This comment was made about the existing research evidence.
Nor did I say that the practice of setting is "damaging". In fact, I said that there may be pragmatic reasons for setting pupils for maths in Years 5 and 6 because planning can be easier if the attainment range in class is not too wide.
My views on setting are expressed in the Framework for teaching mathematics which was sent to schools in March.
Director, National Centre for Literacy and Numeracy
59-65 London Street, Reading